Phase I
Designing has developed over the past years with the current model, adopting different landscape in the activity. The design has completely taken a new path in Europe and US with the adoption of art known as co-designing. The two articles “Co Design_Co-Creation and New Landscape of Design” and “Nesta” were written by authors with the Different point of view as shown in each article.
For instance, in the article Nesta, the author vividly explains of importance developing new designs. He explains that these plans motivate the designer to innovate new possibilities in the field of design. The author of his article explains the strengths and importance of investing the new models in social media. On the other hand, the author of article “Co Design Co-Creation and New Landscape of Design” has a different point of view regarding designing. The point of view of the author is that the design is in evolution due to research and hence it can it is improving. It is moving from user-centered approach design to co-designing, wherein the new stage the role of the designers is changing.
Each author of these articles provides a different theory from each other. Elizabeth and Pieter, who are the authors of the co-design article, present some methods in the field of designing. One of the theories evident in the article is the theory or concept of new domains of collective creativity. The emergence of this creative tool calls for the use of new tools for methods in co-designing and also new ways of researching. On the other hand, the author of Nesta comes up with a new theory of understanding the user experiences including the strengths of the user, challenges among other facts. The research can be carried out by use of a method called ethnography that aims to understand how the user id is feeling about the design.
The main issue of the texts is how the co-designing can be applied in improving social innovation. Therefore, an excellent thesis of the texts can be, how to improve the social innovation through co-designing. The authors of the texts represent facts that are well supported by the research and data included in the text.
Phase II
The two texts have some comparisons in that they hope for the best future in designing by using new methods explained in each test. Comparing the two versions, it can be discovered that the nature of designing is evolving to a better place. These texts are connected in that they advocate for both the new methods of designing. At a point, both texts show that the co-designing is the new mode of art.
The proposed concepts are readily comparable. One of the text deals with understanding the capability and the challenges of each other while the other advocates for the adoption of co-design. Understanding each other will be important, and co-designing will be easily implemented avoiding the past culture of self-centered designing. The combination of the two concepts can lead to the development of assisting each other in design.It can lead to depletion of the culture of self-centered conception.
There are different emerging challenges, though they are few compared two advantages. The main difficulty is that teams that are involved in design require a full mix of skills. In case they have similar skills, it won’t have any impact. The other one is that some designers find it hard to combine with other. In conclusion, co-designing can be of great importance in social innovation.
Works Cited
Mulgan, Geoff. "What Works And What Could Work better." Designing for Public and Social Innovation (2014): 1-15. Print.
Sanders, Elizabeth and Pieter Jan Stappers. "Co-creation and the new landscapes of Design." International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts (2008): 1-16. Print.
